Diamonds Are Bullshit • Hacker News Board

Re: Diamonds Are Bullshit

#251

Post by kkshin » Wed, Mar 20, 2013, 1:00 AM UTC

I just went through the process of whether I would purchase a diamond engagement ring for my fiancee or not. Rationally, it made absolutely no sense to me for the following reasons:

1) The idea of "blood" diamonds as well as the fat that the industry marks up diamonds to a ridiculous notion without translating any of those benefits to the societies it exploits. 2) There is no tangible benefit to a diamond ring that CZ or similar gem would not provide.

That being said, my fiancee very strongly wanted a genuine diamond ring. When I explained my viewpoints and she understood and said that she did not want to force me to purchase a ring that I felt very conflicted about. At no point was our relationship in jeopardy over the issue. Even so, I knew that she really wanted a rock and it took me a while to figure out what to do.

In the end I decide to get her a ring because it was what she really wanted, even though she was wiling to suppress her desires to respect mine. I wanted to respect her wishes as well. If she had threatened or had gotten upset over the matter, I might have not reached this conclusion. Maybe she's just a super shrewd negotiator.

For me, the biggest blocking point is the human hardship that goes behind the diamond industry, and I was able to somewhat subdue this by seeking out a conflict free diamond provider. There are a couple around and if this is your biggest blocking point as well you should look into it. Artificial diamonds were not an option for me, because at the moment they are not able to provide colorless diamonds afaik.

Re: Diamonds Are Bullshit

#252

Post by vehementi » Wed, Mar 20, 2013, 1:01 AM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #228

erikpukinskis wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Okay how do you distribute child-bearing according to participant interest? Adoption. > How do you distribute child-rearing according to participant interest, bearing in mind that an infant just wants to suck on a breast and doesn't care about your views on gender roles. There are some limits to what can be shared. I advocate going right up to that line. A woman who wants to raise a baby at some point has to make t…

> Adoption. The IQ of children is highly correlated with the IQ of parents. Adoption is not, for educated couples, an alternative to having their own children. > A woman who wants to raise a baby at some point has to make tough choices about formula, breast pumping, bonding, and her other priorities in life. You can make things as equal as possible, but no more. My wife and I have almost identical educational backgro…

> The IQ of children is highly correlated with the IQ of parents. Adoption is not, for educated couples, an alternative to having their own children.

Hahahaha look at this guy. Okay I think he tricked us and is just a troll.

Re: Diamonds Are Bullshit

#253

Post by mikeash » Wed, Mar 20, 2013, 1:04 AM UTC

Zimahl wrote: post #199

mikeash wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As much as you don't need it, a $2000 60" HDTV is still more functional than a purse that costs the same amount of money. Are you serious? Is this a joke? A purse actually serves a useful function. It doesn't serve $2000 of function, but it's useful in that it lets you carry around important items. A TV serves no useful purpose whatsoever . None. Zero. There is nothing useful in your life that the TV lets you do. I…

You are saying that a TV that probably costs to make at least a portion of that $2000 is worth less than a purse that can be knocked off to look EXACTLY THE SAME but cost 2 orders of magnitude less are the same? I won't bother arguing the value of a TV. I think there are many that can argue the value of a designer purse.

We're not talking about worth. The exact words were, "more functional". A purse is obviously more functional than a TV.

Re: Diamonds Are Bullshit

#254

Post by Helianthus » Wed, Mar 20, 2013, 1:05 AM UTC

dclowd9901 wrote: post #249

wutbrodo wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt the point is to demonstrate financial security: Spending three months' salary on a single ring would seem to indicate financial irresponsibility more than financial security (unless it's like a rebate and you sell the ring once you're married? /s). I'm inclined to agree that you're right about the price being the point. I think it has more to do with "You're worth it to me". I still think it's utter bollocks.

Diamonds aren't popular because they have any real value. No one actually believes they do. They cost a lot and are an easily worn, thus making them perfect for their favorite hobby: making other women feel inadequate. Even women who are positively liberal on such matters are drawn to the idea of forcing their husbands to show such monetary devotion. The issue here isn't the scarcity of diamonds. It's the scarcity if…

>Charities, if you're listening, here's an idea: create uniquely identified jewelry (bracelets, necklaces) marketed as devotional donations

This is actually a very interesting idea. It has I guess a few complications--are we comfortable with making generosity a commodity? I'm not at all, actually--but at the very least it would be preferable to diamond rings.

Re: Diamonds Are Bullshit

#255

Post by rayiner » Wed, Mar 20, 2013, 1:06 AM UTC

clicks wrote: post #238

rayiner wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're a society of monkeys that use social convention as a fluid device for mediating social interaction. We are a species where, thus far, the burdens of motherhood are associated with a single gender. We are a species that derives deep satisfaction from reproducing (from hard-wired hormonal responses), and have structured our society so that it would collapse without the assurance of continued generations of future…

We are a species where, thus far, the burdens of motherhood are associated with a single gender I agree with you here. I don't know why the HN crowd is refusing to see this point... an infant in its early months really needs the mother. But I disagree on the point that the role of motherhood inextricably falls down on a woman's turf for the years to come. As a male I can say that I would be happy to be a stay-at-home…

> But I disagree on the point that the role of motherhood inextricably falls down on a woman's turf for the years to come.

As a practical matter, the latter follows the former, almost inexorably. Between the negative stigma of being pregnant at work to the negative stigma of taking maternity leave, to the negative stigma of having to be there for your young child when it is still in the "I need my mommy" stage (which lasts into the first couple of years), by the time the father can assume a fully co-equal role in parenting the woman has already substantially compromised her career and it becomes rational, in a perverse way, for her to be the one to undertake further compromises.

Re: Diamonds Are Bullshit

#256

Post by Helianthus » Wed, Mar 20, 2013, 1:07 AM UTC

stephengillie wrote: post #247

maratd wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> so they just leave De Beers to run around gouging consumers That's kind of missing the point. If diamonds were 5 bucks a piece, women would no longer be interested in receiving rings bejeweled by them. A woman wants a man who is financially secure. If you can't afford a shiny rock, you can't afford what's coming after it either, so there's no point.

Women can't use another proxy to signal financial security, like the dollar amount in a bank account, or a house down-payment, or a secure job? Women can't talk for themselves? Do women still want a man who is financially secure? What about independent women? How many women have posted in this thread (compared to HN's overall male-female posting ratio)?

On that subject, perhaps it's noteworthy re: diamonds that the loudest--as far as attention goes--feminine point of view (in the heteronormative sense) in this topic has been expressed only by proxy.

Or, as you indicate, perhaps that's just a symptom of the general male-female ratio.

Re: Diamonds Are Bullshit

#257

Post by InclinedPlane » Wed, Mar 20, 2013, 1:08 AM UTC

mech4bg wrote: post #214

InclinedPlane wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Infidelity is also human nature. Is that also just to be expected in a relationship? If someone isn't willing to compromise in the face of reason (e.g. "we can't afford an expensive wedding or a ring", or "I'm concerned about supporting conflict in Africa and supporting the diamond cartel") then I'd say the relationship is probably not strong enough to last.

But it's not as clear cut that this is a 'negative' aspect of human nature, and I would strongly argue that infidelity is NOT necessarily human nature, at least not as fundamentally as gift giving / signaling. And you're moving the argument here - previously we were talking about buying an expensive ring, not supporting armed conflict or purchasing something you can't afford.

Given the state of the economy and the average savings rate in the US the "typical" diamond engagement ring is simply not affordable for many people. More so, the idea that acquiring a diamond through the De Beers cartel does not at worst indirectly support conflict in sub-saharan Africa and at best help prop up brutal dictatorships is just extraordinarily naive.

Re: Diamonds Are Bullshit

#258

Post by eli » Wed, Mar 20, 2013, 1:11 AM UTC

stephengillie wrote: post #247

maratd wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> so they just leave De Beers to run around gouging consumers That's kind of missing the point. If diamonds were 5 bucks a piece, women would no longer be interested in receiving rings bejeweled by them. A woman wants a man who is financially secure. If you can't afford a shiny rock, you can't afford what's coming after it either, so there's no point.

Women can't use another proxy to signal financial security, like the dollar amount in a bank account, or a house down-payment, or a secure job? Women can't talk for themselves? Do women still want a man who is financially secure? What about independent women? How many women have posted in this thread (compared to HN's overall male-female posting ratio)?

How do you signal the value of your bank account besides using it to buy expensive things? (And this is certainly not a gender-specific problem: consider sports cars, gold chains, or bottle service at clubs)

Re: Diamonds Are Bullshit

#259

Post by rayiner » Wed, Mar 20, 2013, 1:14 AM UTC

YZF wrote: post #246

rayiner wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It irks me a little bit that the issue is painted as one of "reason" versus lack thereof. There is a rationality in adhering to social convention. My wife is a diamond nerd, as well as one of the most rational people you'll ever meet, and she'd explain it this way: the diamond is a test that serves various useful purposes from the perspective of the woman: 1) It demonstrates the man's ability to provide; 2) It demons…

> Pregnancy and childbirth is a barbaric process Seriously? I guess this just shows one aspect of how screwed up our modern society is.

Have you ever been pregnant or had a child? It's 9 months of misery punctuated by 12 hours of stress and agony, relieved only by the epidural. That's followed by weeks of pain and bleeding, and major bodily changes of various degrees of permanence (stretched out abdominal muscles, stretched out hips). Oh, and post-partum depression. And that's if you're lucky. Childbirth can last way longer than 12 hours, it can involve vaginal tearing that requires reconstructive surgery (not uncommon), and is ultimately the most life-threatening and risky thing your average person will ever do.

Yeah, it's "magical" and whatnot, but my wife would rather be water-boarded than be pregnant again.

Re: Diamonds Are Bullshit

#260

Post by eli » Wed, Mar 20, 2013, 1:16 AM UTC

robotmay wrote: post #129

One of my favourite customs for propositioning marriage has, unfortunately, largely died out. In Wales, and I believe parts of Scandinavia (which opens up interesting theories as to vikings bringing the custom to Wales), a man would propose with a spoon: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lovespoon To me that is infinitely more expressive and thoughtful than purchasing a transparent rock. Maybe it's because I currently liv…

Forgetting about diamonds for a moment, I think there's something nice about a ring: a symbol of commitment that everyone can see. Only bummer is that it's not customary for a man to wear one before marriage.